Earning a fast buck
Life is full of mysteries. A simple question I have never managed to get answered is why, if speed cameras are such a deterrent, does the revenue go up year after year? None of these tax collecting partnerships of police and local authorities seem to have an answer.
It seems that in 1997 and the dawning of the age of Cool Britannia 713,000 fixed penalty notices were issued to drivers but by last year it had reached 1.8 milliion a year. I don't think you need a double first in maths from Cambridge to work out that as a deterrent the speed camera appears to be as effective as off licences are in deterring drinking. Mind you with more than £106 million a year revenue coming in, flash by flash we probably already have our answer.
(4) comments so far add yours here
Share:
Older/Newer
« Experienced crime fighter | And the answer is . . . hold the line please »
4 Comments
Leave a comment
Keep up to date
Technorati
Authors
Roger Clarke
Birmingham’s very own Grumpy Old Man on what gets right up his nose.
Roger,
Maybe you do need a double first in maths.... As you don't state how many speed cameras are generating the fixed penalty notices in each case, you can't draw any conclusions as to how much of a deterrant the speed cameras are. If there were 5,000 cameras in 1997 and 15,000 cameras in 2007, the average number of penalty notices per camera would have fallen from 143 to 120, thus indicating that they are a deterrant.
James
If you believe they are genuinely deterrents then fine. Give my regards to the tooth fairy next time you see her, by the way.
I have no opinion either way on the matter Roger. I was merely pointing out that you cannot use the statistics you quote to justify your conclusion that they aren't a deterrant.
I don't know if the number of speed cameras has actually risen between 1997 and 2007, although I suspect it has. You appear to have data on the number of fixed penalty notices issued (although you don't quote a source) - I would assume that this source would also give the number of cameras in both 1997 and 2007. If you are confident that they are a deterrant, you should quote a figure for the number of cameras each year, which would only serve to back up your argument.
That should obviously read 'If you are confident that they aren't a deterrant'...